The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Core release test bed (was: Re: Unidentified subject!)

On Sun, 23 Feb 1997, Richard Jones wrote:
> > Go ahead. But it shouldn't be a package. We already have cvsup as Debian
> > package. With it we could simply establish a server that carries the whole
> > CVS tree. try to develop some sheme where we only need to download/update
> > with CVSUP and then start the compile.
> > 
> 
> 
> I agree, most of the coding work has been done to put this in place, something 
> I would like to see is a gzip wrapper for cvsup which allows local users to 
> store their source compressed and still sup from the main source tree (usually 
> you would need to keep an entire source tree uncompressed on your system, not 
> much fun if you don't own a hard drive company).  A list of packages and their 
> current size/date could be used to avoid uncompressing each bit of the tree to 
> check if it needed updating.

It is not that bad. For example the whole source tree of the core system 
in FreeBSD is ~150MB. During a make works this swells up to 450MB

I would say pretty much everyone can afford half a gig today.
Heck, alone my Linux _kernel_ source trees that I keep swallow up more. 
 
> > The problem with tis sheme is that we need to reorganize the current
> > package tree. Essential (standard) packages need to go into one
> > directory tree, add-on packages into another, so that you can distinguish
> > between them while downloading with CVSUP.
> 
> I think reorgansing would be worth it for the benefits of distrib building 
> providing by CVS.  CVS enables you to do all types of funky stuff like keeping 
> just one tree for stable and unstable (hell you could even have "very stable" 
> like some people have mentioned), and build the stable and very stable 
> distributions from this (i.e. set a date at which unstable becomes stable and 
> simply build a source tree as of that date), I'm not a CVS guru but I imagine 
> there would be some way to do a stable + important fixes build also.

Exactly.
 
> Also at the risk of boring repition I will say *again* that a CVSUP type 
> source tree not only offers a good way of having a distribution built from 
> scratch, it also offers huge bandwidth savings as well as added security (if 
> both master and maintainer sites are compromised all the checksumming in the 
> world will not help [yeah you could store checksums at 3rd party but then what 
> if *they* are compromised as well]), now if you think your site is still safe 
> CVS diffs will tell you if something bad is happening to the main tree.

Yes. I don't think that I need to add much to that anymore.

Mike

Michael Neuffer                i-Connect.Net, a Division of iConnect Corp.
mike@i-Connect.Net             Home of the Debian Master Server.
mike@debian.org                14355 SW Allen Blvd., Suite 140
503.641.8774                   Beaverton, OR 97005




--
Please respect the confidentiality of material on the debian-private list.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com